Gon, i don't get it. Just because you lost with jewel open means it is balanced? I lost with it too what does that mean? By the way i have a 56% win rate so how does that work into your equation?

I don't have the answers and not sure if the card itself is OP or not.

Gadu,

Good point though. I mean right now the lv 6 options for falkow are in my opinion a bit weaker than say lawtia or gowen or refess imagine playing arthropleurid t 3 ! i haven't seen it yet but i guess they are playing jewel then like lost tome or something? Perhaps truth of regus on a gamble?

Cheers,AD

Nought's had, all's spent, Where our desire is got without content;'Tis safer to be that which we destroy Than by destruction dwell in doubtful joy.

I think lots of empirical evidence is needed to warrant an "over-powered" claim. I also think most of the complaints in this thread were about tidal, Faytis, and Mediator SS. I don't think Jewel is OP at all, but if Logress shows RP data suggesting that it IS OP, then I would believe you guys.

OR, if someone wants to show a side by side comparison of a traditional cath open to a Jewel open and show how Jewel is strictly better, I'd love to see that too.

GonFreeces31 wrote:I think lots of empirical evidence is needed to warrant an "over-powered" claim. I also think most of the complaints in this thread were about tidal, Faytis, and Mediator SS. I don't think Jewel is OP at all, but if Logress shows RP data suggesting that it IS OP, then I would believe you guys.

OR, if someone wants to show a side by side comparison of a traditional cath open to a Jewel open and show how Jewel is strictly better, I'd love to see that too.

Playing a lv 6 on t3- possibly. Of course this could be disrupted with shade etc. though i have to imagine playing jewel-tome-mantis with say a + 2 or 3 sp (shvara) 1st ss followed by ? Would talisman mystic be good as a follow up aince mantis isimmune from attack? I mean your opp would effectively be out of grims pretty early if this sequence went off.

Cheers,AD

Nought's had, all's spent, Where our desire is got without content;'Tis safer to be that which we destroy Than by destruction dwell in doubtful joy.

GonFreeces31 wrote:I think lots of empirical evidence is needed to warrant an "over-powered" claim. I also think most of the complaints in this thread were about tidal, Faytis, and Mediator SS. I don't think Jewel is OP at all, but if Logress shows RP data suggesting that it IS OP, then I would believe you guys.

OR, if someone wants to show a side by side comparison of a traditional cath open to a Jewel open and show how Jewel is strictly better, I'd love to see that too.

You know what? I love how you guys talk up a big game about "if the data shows it", but when push comes to shove, Logress is an English major, you're a squishy psych PhD, Romdeau has a BS in that as well, and generally, the whole balance team is crap at data analysis and math (unless imortal is still around, but I have reason to be skeptical of him as well). The creator of M:tG, Richard Garfield, when he was creating it, was pursuing a PhD in UPenn in computational combinatorics, or some other crazy, off the wall graduate-level math, and so were some of his collaborators (I spoke to one once upon a time who helped him out and was getting a PhD in physics at UPenn).

Long story short? Even if you guys had the data, you wouldn't know what to do with it, and nor do I think you have the proper metrics to know what to do with it. There's a reason the erratas have been consistent failures--that is, they patch up the current set, until the next one comes out, and the environment is same crap, different cards. At the end of the day, the only common factor in all your failures is you. So yes, I'm calling you out, because you want to talk like you're a data expert, yet to my knowledge, everyone on the errata team just hasn't put in the time in learning data science/machine learning/etc. for me to take you seriously.

So in the meantime, I suggest you take the arguments in this thread with a bit more respect than you do, because what players experience is probably something they do a far better job articulating and pinpointing than you can with your half-hearted amateur data analysis skills.

Well i would argue that earning a bachelor's of science might indeed require using the scientific method but alas this is not so. I am not afraid to cast stones though overtly a little leas likely than aqvas at doing so. That said i agree wi th a mathematical approach to the card development rather than some quasi empirical staistical hocus pocus that i frequently hear but never see.

Drop me some numbers and i guarantee I can run circles with them around you faster than you can interpret them.

From what i have seen though Rom has made some pretty good arguments on cards/card development. I haven't had issue with his arguments on card development. Graymas may well bethemost balanced card in all set 11.

Cheers,AD

Nought's had, all's spent, Where our desire is got without content;'Tis safer to be that which we destroy Than by destruction dwell in doubtful joy.

You can talk all you want. I already clearly articulated what is specifically powerful about Jewel. Not tidal, not faytis, not mediator SS, but the card itself. I articulated it a long time ago and it was never made clear why activating your SS 1 turn earlier is necessarily overpowered. The effect of your opponent getting to their SS faster than you happens many times regardless of cause or salience. By no means does getting to your first SS quickly convey justification for overpowered-ness.